Category Archives: Embryonic Stem Cells


Embryonic stem cells controlled with light: Study reveals …

UC San Francisco researchers have for the first time developed a method to precisely control embryonic stem cell differentiation with beams of light, enabling them to be transformed into neurons in response to a precise external cue.

The technique also revealed an internal timer within stem cells that lets them tune out extraneous biological noise but transform rapidly into mature cells when they detect a consistent, appropriate molecular signal, the authors report in a study published online August 26 in Cell Systems.

"We've discovered a basic mechanism the cell uses to decide whether to pay attention to a developmental cue or to ignore it," said co-senior author Matthew Thomson, PhD, a researcher in the department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology and the Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology at UCSF.

During embryonic development, stem cells perform an elaborately timed dance as they transform from their neutral, undifferentiated form to construct all the major organ systems of the body. Researchers have identified many different molecular cues that signal stem cells when to transform into their mature form, whether it be brain or liver or muscle, at just the right time.

These discoveries have raised hopes that taking control of stem cells could let scientists repair damaged and aging tissues using the body's own potential for regeneration. But so far, getting stem cells to follow instructions en masse has proven far more difficult than researchers once expected.

In recent years, scientists have found that many of the genes encoding these developmental cues constantly flip on and off in undifferentiated stem cells. How the cells manage to ignore these noisy fluctuations but then respond quickly and decisively to authentic developmental cues has remained a mystery.

"These cells receive so many varied inputs," said lead author Cameron Sokolik, a Thomson laboratory research assistant at the time of the study. "The question is how does the cell decide when to differentiate?"

To test how stem cells interpret developmental cues as either crucial signals or mere noise, Thomson and colleagues engineered cultured mouse embryonic stem cells in which the researchers could use a pulse of blue light to switch on the Brn2 gene, a potent neural differentiation cue. By adjusting the strength and duration of the light pulses, the researchers could precisely control the Brn2 dosage and watch how the cells respond.

They discovered that if the Brn2 signal was strong enough and long enough, stem cells would quickly begin to transform into neurons. But if the signal was too weak or too brief, the cells ignored it completely.

"The cells are looking at the length of the signal," Thomson said. "That was a big surprise."

To learn how stem cells were able to weed out fleeting Brn2 signals but respond to persistent ones, co-senior author Stanley Qi, PhD, and co-author Yanxia Liu, PhD, both now at Stanford University, used the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing system to add a fluorescent tag to the transcription factor Nanog, which normally acts as a brake on differentiation. This protein could then be used as a read-out on the cells' decision-making.

The team discovered that Nanog itself is actually key to the cells' impeccable sense of timing. When the Brn2 signal turns on, it disrupts a molecular feedback loop that keeps the cell stable and undifferentiated. In response, Nanog protein levels start to drop. However, the protein takes about four hours to dissipate completely, which makes Nanog an excellent internal stop-watch. If the Brn2 signal is a fluke, Nanog levels can quickly rebound and the cell will do nothing. On the other hand, if Nanog runs out and the Brn2 signal is still on, "it's like a buzzer goes off," Thomson said. "And once it goes, it really goes -- the cells rapidly start converting into neurons."

Thomson believes that similar timer mechanisms may govern stem cell differentiation into many different tissues.

"It's hard for a cell to be both tolerant and fast, to reject minor fluctuations, but respond very precisely and sharply when it sees a signal," he said. "This mechanism is able to do that."

Thomson is a UCSF Sandler Fellow and Systems Biology Fellow. Since 1998, these unique fellowship programs have enabled UCSF to recruit young researchers straight out of graduate school to pursue ambitious high-risk, high-reward science.

Thomson's ambitious big idea is to use the light-inducible differentiation technology his group has developed to study how stem cells produce complex tissues in three dimensions. He imagines a day when researchers can illuminate a bath of undifferentiated stem cells with a pattern of different colors of light and come back the next day to find a complex pattern of blood and nerve and liver tissue forming an organ that can be transplanted into a patient.

"There's lots of promise that we can do these miraculous things like tissue repair or even growing new organs, but in practice, manipulating stem cells has been notoriously noisy, inefficient, and difficult to control," Thomson said. "I think it's because the cell is not a puppet. It's an agent that is constantly interpreting information, like a brain. If we want to precisely manipulate cell fate, we have to understand the information-processing mechanisms in the cell that control how it responds to the things we're trying to do to it."

The rest is here:
Embryonic stem cells controlled with light: Study reveals ...

Embryonic stem cell – ScienceDaily

Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are stem cells derived from the undifferentiated inner mass cells of a human embryo.

Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, meaning they are able to grow (i.e. differentiate) into all derivatives of the three primary germ layers: ectoderm, endoderm and mesoderm.

In other words, they can develop into each of the more than 200 cell types of the adult body as long as they are specified to do so.

Embryonic stem cells are distinguished by two distinctive properties: their pluripotency, and their ability to replicate indefinitely.

ES cells are pluripotent, that is, they are able to differentiate into all derivatives of the three primary germ layers: ectoderm, endoderm, and mesoderm.

These include each of the more than 220 cell types in the adult body.

Pluripotency distinguishes embryonic stem cells from adult stem cells found in adults; while embryonic stem cells can generate all cell types in the body, adult stem cells are multipotent and can produce only a limited number of cell types.

Additionally, under defined conditions, embryonic stem cells are capable of propagating themselves indefinitely.

This allows embryonic stem cells to be employed as useful tools for both research and regenerative medicine, because they can produce limitless numbers of themselves for continued research or clinical use.

Because of their plasticity and potentially unlimited capacity for self-renewal, ES cell therapies have been proposed for regenerative medicine and tissue replacement after injury or disease.

Diseases that could potentially be treated by pluripotent stem cells include a number of blood and immune-system related genetic diseases, cancers, and disorders; juvenile diabetes;

Parkinson's; blindness and spinal cord injuries.

Besides the ethical concerns of stem cell therapy, there is a technical problem of graft-versus-host disease associated with allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

However, these problems associated with histocompatibility may be solved using autologous donor adult stem cells, therapeutic cloning, stem cell banks or more recently by reprogramming of somatic cells with defined factors (e.g. induced pluripotent stem cells).

Other potential uses of embryonic stem cells include investigation of early human development, study of genetic disease and as in vitro systems for toxicology testing.

Read the original:
Embryonic stem cell - ScienceDaily

1. Embryonic Stem Cells [Stem Cell Information]

by Junying Yu* and James A. Thomson**

Human embryonic stem (ES) cells capture the imagination because they are immortal and have an almost unlimited developmental potential (Fig. 1.1: How hESCs are derived). After many months of growth in culture dishes, these remarkable cells maintain the ability to form cells ranging from muscle to nerve to bloodpotentially any cell type that makes up the body. The proliferative and developmental potential of human ES cells promises an essentially unlimited supply of specific cell types for basic research and for transplantation therapies for diseases ranging from heart disease to Parkinson's disease to leukemia. Here we discuss the origin and properties of human ES cells, their implications for basic research and human medicine, and recent research progress since August 2001, when President George W. Bush allowed federal funding of this research for the first time. A previous report discussed progress prior to June 17, 2001 (/info/scireport/.)

Figure 1.1. How Human Embryonic Stem Cells are Derived.

( 2006 Terese Winslow)

Embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos at a developmental stage before the time that implantation would normally occur in the uterus. Fertilization normally occurs in the oviduct, and during the next few days, a series of cleavage divisions occur as the embryo travels down the oviduct and into the uterus. Each of the cells (blastomeres) of these cleavage-stage embryos are undifferentiated, i.e. they do not look or act like the specialized cells of the adult, and the blastomeres are not yet committed to becoming any particular type of differentiated cell. Indeed, each of these blastomeres has the potential to give rise to any cell of the body. The first differentiation event in humans occurs at approximately five days of development, when an outer layer of cells committed to becoming part of the placenta (the trophectoderm) separates from the inner cell mass (ICM). The ICM cells have the potential to generate any cell type of the body, but after implantation, they are quickly depleted as they differentiate to other cell types with more limited developmental potential. However, if the ICM is removed from its normal embryonic environment and cultured under appropriate conditions, the ICM-derived cells can continue to proliferate and replicate themselves indefinitely and still maintain the developmental potential to form any cell type of the body (quot;pluripotencyquot;; see Fig. 1.2: Characteristics of ESCs). These pluripotent, ICM-derived cells are ES cells.

Figure 1.2.Characteristics of Embryonic Stem Cells.

( 2006 Terese Winslow)

The derivation of mouse ES cells was first reported in 1981,1,2 but it was not until 1998 that derivation of human ES cell lines was first reported.3 Why did it take such a long time to extend the mouse results to humans? Human ES cell lines are derived from embryos produced by in vitro fertilization (IVF), a process in which oocytes and sperm are placed together to allow fertilization to take place in a culture dish. Clinics use this method to treat certain types of infertility, and sometimes, during the course of these treatments, IVF embryos are produced that are no longer needed by the couples for producing children. Currently, there are nearly 400,000 IVF-produced embryos in frozen storage in the United States alone,4 most of which will be used to treat infertility, but some of which (~2.8%) are destined to be discarded. IVF-produced embryos that would otherwise have been discarded were the sources of the human ES cell lines derived prior to President Bush's policy decision of August 2001. These human ES cell lines are now currently eligible for federal funding. Although attempts to derive human ES cells were made as early as the 1980s, culture media for human embryos produced by IVF were suboptimal. Thus, it was difficult to culture single-cell fertilized embryos long enough to obtain healthy blastocysts for the derivation of ES cell lines. Also, species-specific differences between mice and humans meant that experience with mouse ES cells was not completely applicable to the derivation of human ES cells. In the 1990s, ES cell lines from two non-human primates, the rhesus monkey5 and the common marmoset,6 were derived, and these offered closer models for the derivation of human ES cells. Experience with non-human primate ES cell lines and improvements in culture medium for human IVF-produced embryos led rapidly to the derivation of human ES cell lines in 1998.3

Because ES cells can proliferate without limit and can contribute to any cell type, human ES cells offer an unprecedented access to tissues from the human body. They will support basic research on the differentiation and function of human tissues and provide material for testing that may improve the safety and efficacy of human drugs (Figure 1.3: Promise of SC Research).7,8 For example, new drugs are not generally tested on human heart cells because no human heart cell lines exist. Instead, researchers rely on animal models. Because of important species-specific differences between animal and human hearts, however, drugs that are toxic to the human heart have occasionally entered clinical trials, sometimes resulting in death. Human ES cell-derived heart cells may be extremely valuable in identifying such drugs before they are used in clinical trials, thereby accelerating the drug discovery process and leading to safer and more effective treatments.911 Such testing will not be limited to heart cells, but to any type of human cell that is difficult to obtain by other sources.

Figure 1.3: The Promise of Stem Cell Research.

( 2006 Terese Winslow)

Human ES cells also have the potential to provide an unlimited amount of tissue for transplantation therapies to treat a wide range of degenerative diseases. Some important human diseases are caused by the death or dysfunction of one or a few cell types, e.g., insulin-producing cells in diabetes or dopaminergic neurons in Parkinson's disease. The replacement of these cells could offer a lifelong treatment for these disorders. However, there are a number of challenges to develop human ES cell-based transplantation therapies, and many years of basic research will be required before such therapies can be used to treat patients. Indeed, basic research enabled by human ES cells is likely to impact human health in ways unrelated to transplantation medicine. This impact is likely to begin well before the widespread use of ES cells in transplantation and ultimately could have a more profound long-term effect on human medicine. Since August 2001, improvements in culture of human ES cells, coupled with recent insights into the nature of pluripotency, genetic manipulation of human ES cells, and differentiation, have expanded the possibilities for these unique cells.

Mouse ES cells and human ES cells were both originally derived and grown on a layer of mouse fibroblasts (called quot;feeder cellsquot;) in the presence of bovine serum. However, the factors that sustain the growth of these two cell types appear to be distinct. The addition of the cytokine, leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), to serum-containing medium allows mouse ES cells to proliferate in the absence of feeder cells. LIF modulates mouse ES cells through the activation of STAT3 (signal transducers and activators of transcription) protein. In serum-free culture, however, LIF alone is insufficient to prevent mouse ES cells from differentiating into neural cells. Recently, Ying et al. reported that the combination of bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) and LIF is sufficient to support the self-renewal of mouse ES cells.12 The effects of BMPs on mouse ES cells involve induction of inhibitor of differentiation (Id) proteins, and inhibition of extracellular receptor kinase (ERK) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK).12,13 However, LIF in the presence of serum is not sufficient to promote the self-renewal of human ES cells,3 and the LIF/STAT3 pathway appears to be inactive in undifferentiated human ES cells.14,15 Also, the addition of BMPs to human ES cells in conditions that would otherwise support ES cells leads to the rapid differentiation of human ES cells.16,17

Several groups have attempted to define growth factors that sustain human ES cells and have attempted to identify culture conditions that reduce the exposure of human ES cells to non human animal products. One important growth factor, bFGF, allows the use of a serum replacement to sustain human ES cells in the presence of fibroblasts, and this medium allowed the clonal growth of human ES cells.18 A quot;feeder-freequot; human ES cell culture system has been developed, in which human ES cells are grown on a protein matrix (mouse Matrigel or Laminin) in a bFGF-containing medium that is previously quot;conditionedquot; by co-culture with fibroblasts.19 Although this culture system eliminates direct contact of human ES cells with the fibroblasts, it does not remove the potential for mouse pathogens being introduced into the culture via the fibroblasts. Several different sources of human feeder cells have been found to support the culture of human ES cells, thus removing the possibility of pathogen transfer from mice to humans.2023 However, the possibility of pathogen transfer from human to human in these culture systems still remains. More work is still needed to develop a culture system that eliminates the use of fibroblasts entirely, which would also decrease much of the variability associated with the current culture of human ES cells. Sato et al. reported that activation of the Wnt pathway by 6-bromoindirubin3'-oxime (BIO) promotes the self-renewal of ES cells in the presence of bFGF, Matrigel, and a proprietary serum replacement product.24 Amit et al. reported that bFGF, TGF, and LIF could support some human ES cell lines in the absence of feeders.25 Although there are some questions about how well these new culture conditions will work for different human ES cell lines, there is now reason to believe that defined culture conditions for human ES cells, which reduce the potential for contamination by pathogens, will soon be achieved*.

Once a set of defined culture conditions is established for the derivation and culture of human ES cells, challenges to improve the medium will still remain. For example, the cloning efficiency of human ES cellsthe ability of a single human ES cell to proliferate and become a colonyis very low (typically less than 1%) compared to that of mouse ES cells. Another difficulty is the potential for accumulation of genetic and epigenetic changes over prolonged periods of culture. For example, karyotypic changes have been observed in several human ES cell lines after prolonged culture, and the rate at which these changes dominate a culture may depend on the culture method.26,27 The status of imprinted (epigenetically modified) genes and the stability of imprinting in various culture conditions remain completely unstudied in human ES cells**. The status of imprinted genes can clearly change with culture conditions in other cell types.28,29 These changes present potential problems if human ES cells are to be used in cell replacement therapy, and optimizing medium to reduce the rate at which genetic and epigenetic changes accumulate in culture represents a long-term endeavor. The ideal human ES cell medium, then, (a) would be cost-effective and easy to use so that many more investigators can use human ES cells as a research tool; (b) would be composed entirely of defined components not of animal origin; (c) would allow cell growth at clonal densities; and (d) would minimize the rate at which genetic and epigenetic changes accumulate in culture. Such a medium will be a challenge to develop and will most likely be achieved through a series of incremental improvements over a period of years.

Among all the newly derived human ES cell lines, twelve lines have gained the most attention. In March 2004, a South Korean group reported the first derivation of a human ES cell line (SCNT-hES-1) using the technique of somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). Human somatic nuclei were transferred into human oocytes (nuclear transfer), which previously had been stripped of their own genetic material, and the resultant nuclear transfer products were cultured in vitro to the blastocyst stage for ES cell derivation.30*** Because the ES cells derived through nuclear transfer contain the same genetic material as that of the nuclear donor, the intent of the procedure is that the differentiated derivatives would not be rejected by the donor's immune system if used in transplantation therapy. More recently, the same group reported the derivation of eleven more human SCNT-ES cell lines*** with markedly improved efficiency (16.8 oocytes/line vs. 242 oocytes/line in their previous report).31*** However, given the abnormalities frequently observed in cloned animals, and the costs involved, it is not clear how useful this procedure will be in clinical applications. Also, for some autoimmune diseases, such as type I diabetes, merely providing genetically-matched tissue will be insufficient to prevent immune rejection.

Additionally, new human ES cell lines were established from embryos with genetic disorders, which were detected during the practice of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). These new cell lines may provide an excellent in vitro model for studies on the effects that the genetic mutations have on cell proliferation and differentiation.32

* Editor's note: Papers published since this writing report defined culture conditions for human embryonic stem cells. See Ludwig et al., Nat. Biotech 24: 185187, 2006; and Lu et al., PNAS 103:56885693, 2006.08.14.

** Editor's note: Papers published since the time this chapter was written address this: see Maitra et al., Nature Genetics 37, 10991103, 2005; and Rugg-Gunn et al., Nature Genetics 37:585587, 2005.

*** Editor's note: Both papers referenced in 30 and 31 were later retracted: see Science 20 Jan 2006; Vol. 311. No. 5759, p. 335.

To date, more than 120 human ES cell lines have been established worldwide,33* 67 of which are included in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Registry. As of this writing, 21 cell lines are currently available for distribution, all of which have been exposed to animal products during their derivation. Although it has been eight years since the initial derivation of human ES cells, it is an open question as to the extent that independent human ES cell lines differ from one another. At the very least, the limited number of cell lines cannot represent a reasonable sampling of the genetic diversity of different ethnic groups in the United States, and this has consequences for drug testing, as adverse reactions to drugs often reflect a complex genetic component. Once defined culture conditions are well established for human ES cells, there will be an even more compelling need to derive additional cell lines.

* Editor's note: One recent report now estimates 414 hESC lines, see Guhr et al., http://www.StemCells.com early online version for June 15, 2006: quot;Current State of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Overview of Cell Lines and their Usage in Experimental Work.quot;

The ability of ES cells to develop into all cell types of the body has fascinated scientists for years, yet remarkably little is known about factors that make one cell pluripotent and another more restricted in its developmental potential. The transcription factor Oct4 has been used as a key marker for ES cells and for the pluripotent cells of the intact embryo, and its expression must be maintained at a critical level for ES cells to remain undifferentiated.34 The Oct4 protein itself, however, is insufficient to maintain ES cells in the undifferentiated state. Recently, two groups identified another transcription factor, Nanog, that is essential for the maintenance of the undifferentiated state of mouse ES cells.35,36 The expression of Nanog decreased rapidly as mouse ES cells differentiated, and when its expression level was maintained by a constitutive promoter, mouse ES cells could remain undifferentiated and proliferate in the absence of either LIF or BMP in serum-free medium.12 Nanog is also expressed in human ES cells, though at a much lower level compared to that of Oct4, and its function in human ES cells has yet to be examined.

By comparing gene expression patterns between different ES cell lines and between ES cells and other cell types such as adult stem cells and differentiated cells, genes that are enriched in the ES cells have been identified. Using this approach, Esg-1, an uncharacterized ES cell-specific gene, was found to be exclusively associated with pluripotency in the mouse.37 Sperger et al. identified 895 genes that are expressed at significantly higher levels in human ES cells and embryonic carcinoma cell lines, the malignant counterparts to ES cells.38 Sato et al. identified a set of 918 genes enriched in undifferentiated human ES cells compared with their differentiated counterparts; many of these genes were shared by mouse ES cells.39 Another group, however, found 92 genes, including Oct4 and Nanog, enriched in six different human ES cell lines, which showed limited overlap with those in mouse ES cell lines.40 Care must be taken to interpret these data, and the considerable differences in the results may arise from the cell lines used in the experiments, methods to prepare and maintain the cells, and the specific methods used to profile gene expression.

Since establishing human ES cells in 1998, scientists have developed genetic manipulation techniques to determine the function of particular genes, to direct the differentiation of human ES cells towards specific cell types, or to tag an ES cell derivative with a certain marker gene. Several approaches have been developed to introduce genetic elements randomly into the human ES cell genome, including electroporation, transfection by lipid-based reagents, and lentiviral vectors.4144 However, homologous recombination, a method in which a specific gene inside the ES cells is modified with an artificially introduced DNA molecule, is an even more precise method of genetic engineering that can modify a gene in a defined way at a specific locus. While this technology is routinely used in mouse ES cells, it has recently been successfully developed in human ES cells (See chapter 4: Genetically Modified Stem Cells), thus opening new doors for using ES cells as vehicles for gene therapy and for creating in vitro models of human genetic disorders such as Lesch-Nyhan disease.45,46 Another method to test the function of a gene is to use RNA interference (RNAi) to decrease the expression of a gene of interest (see Figure 1.4: RNA interference). In RNAi, small pieces of double-stranded RNA (siRNA; small interfering RNA) are either chemically synthesized and introduced directly into cells, or expressed from DNA vectors. Once inside the cells, the siRNA can lead to the degradation of the messenger RNA (mRNA), which contains the exact sequence as that of the siRNA. mRNA is the product of DNA transcription and normally can be translated into proteins. RNAi can work efficiently in somatic cells, and there has been some progress in applying this technology to human ES cells.4749

Figure 1.4. How RNAi Can Be Used To Modify Stem Cells.

( 2006 Terese Winslow)

The pluripotency of ES cells suggests possible widespread uses for these cells and their derivatives. The ES cell-derived cells can potentially be used to replace or restore tissues that have been damaged by disease or injury, such as diabetes, heart attacks, Parkinson's disease or spinal cord injury. The recent developments in these particular areas are discussed in detail in other chapters, and Table 1 summarizes recent publications in the differentiation of specific cell lineages.

The differentiation of ES cells also provides model systems to study early events in human development. Because of possible harm to the resulting child, it is not ethically acceptable to experimentally manipulate the postimplantation human embryo. Therefore, most of what is known about the mechanisms of early human embryology and human development, especially in the early postimplantation period, is based on histological sections of a limited number of human embryos and on analogy to the experimental embryology of the mouse. However, human and mouse embryos differ significantly, particularly in the formation, structure, and function of the fetal membranes and placenta, and the formation of an embryonic disc instead of an egg cylinder.5052 For example, the mouse yolk sac is a well-vascularized, robust, extraembryonic organ throughout gestation that provides important nutrient exchange functions. In humans, the yolk sac also serves important early functions, including the initiation of hematopoiesis, but it becomes essentially a vestigial structure at later times or stages in gestation. Similarly, there are dramatic differences between mouse and human placentas, both in structure and function. Thus, mice can serve in a limited capacity as a model system for understanding the developmental events that support the initiation and maintenance of human pregnancy. Human ES cell lines thus provide an important new in vitro model that will improve our understanding of the differentiation of human tissues, and thus provide important insights into processes such as infertility, pregnancy loss, and birth defects.

Human ES cells are already contributing to the study of development. For example, it is now possible to direct human ES cells to differentiate efficiently to trophoblast, the outer layer of the placenta that mediates implantation and connects the conceptus to the uterus.17,53 Another use of human ES cells is for the study of germ cell development. Cells resembling both oocytes and sperm have been successfully derived from mouse ES cells in vitro.5456 Recently, human ES cells have also been observed to differentiate into cells expressing genes characteristic of germ cells.57 Thus it may also be possible to derive oocytes and sperm from human ES cells, allowing the detailed study of human gametogenesis for the first time. Moreover, human ES cell studies are not limited to early differentiation, but are increasingly being used to understand the differentiation and functions of many human tissues, including neural, cardiac, vascular, pancreatic, hepatic, and bone (see Table 1). Moreover, transplantation of ES-derived cells has offered promising results in animal models.5867

Although scientists have gained more insights into the biology of human ES cells since 2001, many key questions remain to be addressed before the full potential of these unique cells can be realized. It is surprising, for example, that mouse and human ES cells appear to be so different with respect to the molecules that mediate their self-renewal, and perhaps even in their developmental potentials. BMPs, for example, in combination with LIF, promote the self-renewal of mouse ES cells. But in conditions that would otherwise support undifferentiated proliferation, BMPs cause rapid differentiation of human ES cells. Also, human ES cells differentiate quite readily to trophoblast, whereas mouse ES cells do so poorly, if at all. One would expect that at some level, the basic molecular mechanisms that control pluripotency would be conserved, and indeed, human and mouse ES cells share the expression of many key genes. Yet we remain remarkably ignorant about the molecular mechanisms that control pluripotency, and the nature of this remarkable cellular state has become one of the central questions of developmental biology. Of course, the other great challenge will be to continue to unravel the factors that control the differentiation of human ES cells to specific lineages, so that ES cells can fulfill their tremendous promise in basic human biology, drug screening, and transplantation medicine.

We thank Lynn Schmidt, Barbara Lewis, Sangyoon Han and Deborah J. Faupel for proofreading this report.

Notes:

* Genetics and Biotechnology Building, Madison, WI 53706, Email: jyu@primate.wisc.edu.

** John D. MacArthur Professor, Department of Anatomy, University of WisconsinMadison Medical School, The Genome Center of Wisconsin, and The Wisconsin National Primate Research Center, Madison, WI 53715, Email: thomson@primate.wisc.edu.

Introduction|Table of Contents|Chapter 2

More here:
1. Embryonic Stem Cells [Stem Cell Information]

Children’s Hospital Boston Glossary – Stem cell

Choose a Term... Adult stem cell Allogeneic Autologous Blastocyst Blastomeres Bone marrow Cell culture Cell line Cellular reprogramming Chimera Clinical research Cloning Co-culture Cord blood stem cells Culture medium Development Differentiation Disease modeling Drug screening Ectoderm Endotherm Embryo Embryoid body Embryonic germ cell Embryonic stem cell Epigenetic Expressed Feeder cells Fertilization Fetus Fibroblast Gene Gene expression Gene therapy Genome Genotype Germ cell Germ layer Germ line GMP Graft rejection Graft-versus-host disease Hematopoietic Histocompatibility Immunosuppression Implantation In utero In vitro In vitro fertilization In vivo Induced pluripotent cell Inner Cell Mass IRB Mesenchymal Stem Cells Mesoderm Morula Multipotent Neural stem cell Nuclear transfer Nucleus Oocyte Nullipotency Oligopotency Parthenogenesis Passage Phenotype Plasticity Pluripotent Primitive streak Pre-implantation Progenitor cell Regenerative medicine Reproductive cloning Reprogramming Retrovirus RNAi Self-renewal Somatic Somatic cell nuclear transfer Stem Cell Teratoma Therapeutic cloning Tissue Engineering Tissue-specific stem cell Totipotent Transcription Transcriptional profile Transdifferentiation Transduction Transfection Transformation Transgene Translation Translational research Transplantation Trophectoderm Umbilical cord stem cells Unipotency Xenograft and Xenotransplantation Zona pellucida Zygote

Adult stem cell: Tissue-specific stem cells. A stem cell found in fetal and/or adult tissues that typically generates the type of tissue in which it is found (blood stem cells make blood, neural stem cells make neurons, and so forth).

Allogeneic: Cells or tissue obtained from donors for use in transplantation. The term applies if the donor is related or unrelated to the transplant recipient.

Autologous: Cells or tissue obtained from the patient. Sometimes a patient will have a portion of her own tissues stored for therapeutic use later. Examples include privately banked umbilical cord blood or a patients own bone marrow that is stored prior to receiving chemotherapy for solid tumors. The patients own marrow may then be transplanted at a later date to rescue the person from the side effects of chemotherapy on her blood system.

Blastocyst: The four-to-nine day-old embryo (post-fertilization) which consists of 100-200 total cells and is approximately 1/10 of a millimeter in diameter (roughly the size of a period at the end of this sentence). This stage of development is prior to implantation in the uterus. Only two types of cells are present at this time, the trophectoderm (foundation of the placenta) and the inner-cell mass or ICM, which will also contribute cells to the extraembryonic tissues as well as the entire fetus. The blastocyst looks like a hollow, fluid-filled ball of trophectodermal cells where the ICM forms a slight lump on the inner wall. It is from this developmental stage that the vast majority of embryonic stem cells are obtained.

Blastomeres: The earliest cleavage stages of the embryo. The fertilized egg (zygote) cleaves to make two cells termed blastomeres which in turn cleave to make four and so on. The blastomeres are no longer called such at the morula stage of pre-implantation development. Blastomeres are totipotent as removal of one blastomere may create an identical twin in vivo.

Bone marrow: The spongy tissue that fills most long bone cavities and contains hematopoietic stem cells. The bone marrow also contains other cell types such as mesenchymal stem cells, endothelial (vascular) cells, macrophages (debris clearing cells), and more.

Cell culture: The process of growing cells in the laboratory.

Cell line: A culture of related cells. A single embryo may be used to produce a line (or population) of cells that are genetically identical to one another as they divide and create a larger population. Two different cell lines originate from two different embryos. Cell lines may be expanded (i.e. put into cell culture to make greater numbers of them), frozen, and/or shared with other scientists. Thus, a single cell line may be simultaneously cultured in laboratories around the world as it is maintained and shared by different scientists.

Cellular reprogramming: The process of changing a cells gene expression profile from one type (such as a neuron) to another type (such as an embryonic stem cell).

See more here:
Children's Hospital Boston Glossary - Stem cell

Pros & Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Spencer Platt/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Pros

Embryonic stem cells are thought by most scientists and researchers to hold potential cures for spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, Parkinson's disease, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, hundreds of rare immune system and genetic disorders and much more.

Scientists see almost infinite value in the use of embryonic stem cell research to understand human development and the growth and treatment of dieases.

Actual cures are many years away, though, since research has not progressed to the point where even one cure has yet been generated by embryonic stem cell research.

Over 100 million Americans suffer from diseases that eventually may be treated more effectively or even cured with embryonic stem cell therapy. Some researchers regard this as the greatest potential for the alleviation of human suffering since the advent of antibiotics.

Many pro-lifers believe that the proper moral and religious course of action is to save existing life through embryonic stem cell therapy.

Cons

Some staunch pro-lifers and most pro-life organizations regard the destruction of the blastocyst, which is a laboratory-fertilized human egg, to be the murder of human life. They believe that life begins at conception, and that destruction of this pre-born life is morally unacceptable.

They believe that it is immoral to destroy a few-days-old human embryo, even to save or reduce suffering in existing human life.

See the original post here:
Pros & Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Embryonic stem cells: where do they come from and what can …

Embryonic stem cells are derived from very early embryos called blastocysts; the diameter of a human blastocyst is roughly four times that of a human hair

A human blastocyst next to a human hair

A mouse blastocyst aged 3.5 days; the inner cell mass is coloured green and the trophectoderm is coloured red

Embryonic stem cells genetically modified to glow green under a fluorescent lamp

A chimeric mouse and his offspring; the offspring have a gene for black hair from the ES cells used to make their father

Neurons (nerve cells) made in the lab from human embryonic stem cells

Embryonic stem cells are grown from cells found in the embryo when it is just a few days old. In humans, mice and other mammals, the embryo is a ball of approximately 100 cells at this stage. It is known as a blastocyst and has two parts:

Some of the cellsin the inner cell mass are pluripotent: they can make every type of cell in the body.

If an inner cell mass is taken from a mouse blastocyst and given the right nutrients, the pluripotent cells cangrow in the laboratory. The process of cell maturation and specialization that would normally take place in the embryo stops. Instead, the cells multiply to make more undifferentiated cells that resemble the cells of the inner cell mass. These laboratory-grown cells are called embryonic stem (ES) cells.

Embryonic stem cells can make copies of themselves and make other types of more specialized cells

See the original post here:
Embryonic stem cells: where do they come from and what can ...

Embryonic Stem Cells – HowStuffWorks

Once an egg cell is fertilized by a sperm, it will divide and become an embryo. In the embryo, there are stem cells that are capable of becoming all of the various cell types of the human body. For research, scientists get embryos in two ways. Many couples conceive by the process of in vitro fertilization. In this process, a couple's sperm and eggs are fertilized in a culture dish. The eggs develop into embryos, which are then implanted in the female. However, more embryos are made than can be implanted. So, these embryos are usually frozen. Many couples donate their unused embryos for stem cell research.

The second way in which scientists get embryos is therapeutic cloning. This technique merges a cell (from the patient who needs the stem cell therapy) with a donor egg. The nucleus is removed from the egg and replaced with the nucleus of the patient's cell. (For a detailed look at the process, see How Cloning Works) This egg is stimulated to divide either chemically or with electricity, and the resulting embryo carries the patient's genetic material, which significantly reduces the risk that his or her body will reject the stem cells once they are implanted.

Both methods -- using existing fertilized embryos and creating new embryos specifically for research purposes -- are controversial. But before we get into the controversy, let's find out how scientists get stem cells to replicate in a laboratory setting in order to study them.

When an embryo contains about eight cells, the stem cells are totipotent - they can develop into all cell types. At three to five days, the embryo develops into a ball of cells called a blastocyst. A blastocyst contains about 100 cells total and the stem cells are inside. At this stage, the stem cells are pluripotent - they can develop into almost any cell type.

To grow the stem cells, scientists remove them from the blastocyst and culture them (grow them in a nutrient-rich solution) in a Petri dish in the laboratory. The stem cells divide several times and scientists divide the population into other dishes. After several months, there are millions of stem cells. If the cells continue to grow without differentiating, then the scientists have a stem cell line. Cell lines can be frozen and shared between laboratories. As we will see later, stem cell lines are necessary for developing therapies.

Today, many expectant mothers are asked about umbilical cord banking -- the process of storing umbilical cord blood after giving birth. Why would someone want to do that? Once a mother gives birth, the umbilical cord and remaining blood are often discarded. However, this blood also contains stem cells from the fetus. Umbilical cord blood can be harvested and the embryonic stem cells grown in culture. Unlike embryonic stem cells from earlier in development, fetal stem cells from umbilical cord blood are multipotent - they can develop into a limited number of cell types.

Now that you have a better understanding of embryonic stem cells, let's look at adult stem cells.

Original post:
Embryonic Stem Cells - HowStuffWorks

Embryonic Stem Cell Research Pros and Cons | HRF

There may not be a greater debate in the medical community right now than that of embryonic stem cell research. Initially banned by the Federal government, these stem cells often originate from human embryos that were created for couples with reproductive issues and would be discarded. These stem cells are thought to be the key that will unlock the cure to many diseases, from Alzheimers to rare immune and even genetic disorders. On the other side of the issue, some see the destruction of an embryo as the murder of an unborn child.

The primary benefit of this research is the enormous amount of potential that it holds. Embryonic stem cells have the ability to create new organs, tissues, and systems within the human body. With a little guidance from scientists, these stem cells have shown that they can become new organs, new blood vessels, and even new ligaments for those with ACL tears. By culturing stem cells and them implanting them, recovery times could be halved for many serious injuries, illnesses, and diseases.

Because nearly one-third of the population could benefit from treatments and therapies that could originate from embryonic stem cell research, many scientists believe that this field could alleviate as much human suffering as the development of antibiotics was able to do. Because funding was restricted on embryonic stem cell lines for several years, however, the chances of any therapies being viable in the near future are slim.

The primary argument against this research is a moral one. Some people see the creation of an embryo as the creation of life, so to terminate that life would equate to murder. This primarily originates from a point of view where life as we define it begins at conception, which would mean that any medical advancement from this research would be at best unethical.

Those against this research argue that since the creation of this research field in the early 1980s, there have been no advancements in it whatsoever. Because of this lack of advancement, it could mean decades of additional research, thousands of embryos destroyed to further that research, and that is morally unacceptable for some.

The debate about embryonic stem cell research isnt in the potential benefits that this field of study could produce. It is in the ethics and morality of how embryonic stem cells are created. There often is no in-between view in this area: you either define life at some part of the physical development of the human body during the pregnancy or you define it at conception. This view then tends to lead each person to one side of this debate. Where do you stand?

View original post here:
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Pros and Cons | HRF

NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry – Research Using …

CHB-1 (see details) 0001 On Hold ** George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-2 (see details) 0002 On Hold ** George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-3 (see details) 0003 On Hold ** George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-4 (see details) 0004 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-5 (see details) 0005 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-6 (see details) 0006 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-8 (see details) 0007 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-9 (see details) 0008 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-10 (see details) 0009 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-11 (see details) 0010 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 CHB-12 (see details) 0011 George Q. Daley, M.D., Ph.D. Children's Hospital Corporation 12/02/2009 RUES1 (see details) 0012 The Rockefeller University, Ali Brivanlou The Rockefeller University 12/02/2009 RUES2 (see details) 0013 The Rockefeller University, Ali Brivanlou The Rockefeller University 12/02/2009 HUES 1 (see details) 0014 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 2 (see details) 0015 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 3 (see details) 0016 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 4 (see details) 0017 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 5 (see details) 0018 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 6 (see details) 0019 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 7 (see details) 0020 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 8 (see details) 0021 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 9 (see details) 0022 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 10 (see details) 0023 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 11 (see details) 0024 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 12 (see details) 0025 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 13 (see details) 0026 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 14 (see details) 0027 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 15 (see details) 0028 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 16 (see details) 0029 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 17 (see details) 0030 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 18 (see details) 0031 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 19 (see details) 0032 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 20 (see details) 0033 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 21 (see details) 0034 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 22 (see details) 0035 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 23 (see details) 0036 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 24 (see details) 0037 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 26 (see details) 0038 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 27 (see details) 0039 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 HUES 28 (see details) 0040 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 12/14/2009 CyT49 (see details) 0041 ViaCyte, Inc. 01/19/2010 RUES3 (see details) 0042 The Rockefeller University, Ali Brivanlou The Rockefeller University 01/19/2010 WA01 (H1) (see details) 0043 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 01/29/2010 UCSF4 (see details) 0044 Susan Fisher University of California San Francisco 03/12/2010 NYUES1 (see details) 0045 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES2 (see details) 0046 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES3 (see details) 0047 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES4 (see details) 0048 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES5 (see details) 0049 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES6 (see details) 0050 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 NYUES7 (see details) 0051 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 03/29/2010 MFS5; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0052 Eric Chiao Stanford University 04/27/2010 HUES 48 (see details) 0053 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 04/27/2010 HUES 49 (see details) 0054 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 04/27/2010 HUES 53 (see details) 0055 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 04/27/2010 HUES 65 (see details) 0056 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 04/27/2010 HUES 66 (see details) 0057 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 04/27/2010 UCLA 1 (see details) 0058 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 04/27/2010 UCLA 2 (see details) 0059 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 04/27/2010 UCLA 3 (see details) 0060 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 04/27/2010 WA07 (H7) (see details) 0061 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 04/27/2010 WA09 (H9) (see details) 0062 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 04/27/2010 WA13 (H13) (see details) 0063 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 04/27/2010 WA14 (H14) (see details) 0064 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 04/27/2010 HUES 62 (see details) 0065 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 06/03/2010 HUES 63 (see details) 0066 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 06/03/2010 HUES 64 (see details) 0067 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 06/03/2010 CT1 (see details) 0068 University of Connecticut Stem Cell Core UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT 06/21/2010 CT2 (see details) 0069 University of Connecticut Stem Cell Core UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT 06/21/2010 CT3 (see details) 0070 University of Connecticut Stem Cell Core UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT 06/21/2010 CT4 (see details) 0071 University of Connecticut Stem Cell Core UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT 06/21/2010 MA135 (see details) 0072 Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. 06/21/2010 Endeavour-2 (see details) 0073 Kuldip Sidhu Stem Cell Laboratory, Faculty of medicine, University of New South Wales 06/21/2010 WIBR1 (see details) 0074 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 06/21/2010 WIBR2 (see details) 0075 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 06/21/2010 HUES 45 (see details) 0076 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 09/28/2010 Shef 3 (see details) 0077 Centre for Stem Cell Biology University of Sheffield 11/17/2010 Shef 6 (see details) 0078 Centre for Stem Cell Biology University of Sheffield 11/17/2010 WIBR3 (see details) 0079 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 11/17/2010 WIBR4 (see details) 0080 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 11/17/2010 WIBR5 (see details) 0081 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 11/17/2010 WIBR6 (see details) 0082 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maya Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 11/17/2010 BJNhem19 (see details) 0083 Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research 12/17/2010 BJNhem20 (see details) 0084 Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research 12/17/2010 SA001 (see details) 0085 Cellartis AB Cellartis AB 12/17/2010 SA002; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0086 Cellartis AB Cellartis AB 12/17/2010 UCLA 4 (see details) 0087 Steven Peckman University of California Los Angeles 02/03/2011 UCLA 5 (see details) 0088 Steven Peckman University of California Los Angeles 02/03/2011 UCLA 6 (see details) 0089 Steven Peckman University of California Los Angeles 02/03/2011 HUES PGD 13; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0090 Eggan Lab Harvard University 03/15/2011 HUES PGD 3; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0091 Eggan Lab Harvard University 03/15/2011 ESI-014 (see details) 0092 BioTime, Inc. 06/02/2011 ESI-017 (see details) 0093 BioTime, Inc. BioTime, Inc. 06/02/2011 HUES PGD 11; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0094 Eggan Lab Harvard University 06/07/2011 HUES PGD 12; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0095 Eggan Lab Harvard University 06/07/2011 WA15 (see details) 0096 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA16; disease-specific mutation/abnormal karyotype (see details) 0097 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA17 (see details) 0098 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA18 (see details) 0099 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA19 (see details) 0100 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA20 (see details) 0101 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA21 (see details) 0102 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA22 (see details) 0103 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA23 (see details) 0104 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 WA24 (see details) 0105 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 06/09/2011 CSES2 (see details) 0106 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES4 (see details) 0107 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES7 (see details) 0108 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES8; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0109 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES11; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0110 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES12; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0111 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES13; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0112 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES14; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0113 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES15 (see details) 0114 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES17 (see details) 0115 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES19 (see details) 0116 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES20; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0117 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES21; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0118 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES22; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0119 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES23; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0120 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES24; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0121 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 CSES25 (see details) 0122 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 06/10/2011 HAD-C 100 (see details) 0123 Benjamin E. Reubinoff Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center 06/16/2011 HAD-C 102 (see details) 0124 Benjamin E. Reubinoff Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center 06/16/2011 HAD-C 106 (see details) 0125 Benjamin E. Reubinoff Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center 06/16/2011 RNJ19; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0126 Reprogenetics, LLC Reprogenetics, LLC 06/16/2011 RNJ20; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0127 Reprogenetics, LLC Reprogenetics, LLC 06/16/2011 RNJ18; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0128 Reprogenetics, LLC Reprogenetics, LLC 06/16/2011 ESI-035 (see details) 0129 BioTime, Inc. BioTime, Inc. 08/18/2011 ESI-049 (see details) 0130 BioTime, Inc. BioTime, Inc. 08/18/2011 ESI-051 (see details) 0131 BioTime, Inc. BioTime, Inc. 08/18/2011 ESI-053 (see details) 0132 BioTime, Inc. BioTime, Inc. 08/18/2011 CSES5; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0133 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 09/27/2011 CSES6; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0134 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 09/27/2011 CSES18 (see details) 0135 Dhruv Sareen, Ph.D. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center 09/27/2011 HUES PGD 14; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0136 Eggan Lab Harvard University 10/11/2011 CA1 (see details) 0137 Andras Nagy Mt Sinai Hosp-Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute 12/12/2011 CA2 (see details) 0138 Andras Nagy Mt Sinai Hosp-Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute 12/12/2011 MEL-1 (see details) 0139 StemCore, Stem Cells Ltd University of Queensland 12/22/2011 MEL-2 (see details) 0140 StemCore, Stem Cells Ltd University of Queensland 12/22/2011 MEL-3 (see details) 0141 StemCore, Stem Cells Ltd University of Queensland 12/22/2011 MEL-4 (see details) 0142 StemCore, Stem Cells Ltd University of Queensland 12/22/2011 UCLA 7; disease-specific mutation/abnormal karyotype (see details) 0143 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 01/12/2012 UCLA 8 (see details) 0144 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 01/12/2012 UCLA 9 (see details) 0145 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 01/12/2012 UCLA 10 (see details) 0146 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 01/12/2012 UM4-6 (see details) 0147 Gary D. Smith, University of Michigan University of Michigan 02/02/2012 HUES PGD 1; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0148 Eggan Lab Harvard University 02/24/2012 HUES PGD 15; possible disease-specific mutation (see details) 0149 Eggan Lab Harvard University 02/24/2012 HUES PGD 16; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0150 Eggan Lab Harvard University 02/24/2012 GENEA002 (see details) 0151 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 03/20/2012 GENEA048; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0152 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 03/20/2012 UM11-1PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0153 Gary D. Smith, University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/12/2012 UM9-1PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0154 Gary D. Smith, University of Michigan University of Michigan 05/14/2012 UM38-2 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0155 Gary D. Smith, University of Michigan University of Michigan 05/14/2012 Elf1 (see details) 0156 University of Washington 05/15/2012 HUES 42 (see details) 0157 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 05/31/2012 HUES 44 (see details) 0158 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 05/31/2012 NMR-1 (see details) 0159 Rick A. Wetsel, Ph.D. University of Texas Hlth Sci Ctr Houston 05/31/2012 UM17-1 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0160 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 05/31/2012 UM15-4 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0161 University of Michigan, Gary D. Smith University of Michigan 05/31/2012 UM14-1 (see details) 0162 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 05/31/2012 UM14-2 (see details) 0163 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 05/31/2012 UM29-2 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0164 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 06/18/2012 UM29-3 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0165 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 06/18/2012 GENEA017; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0166 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA041; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0167 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA068; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0168 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA018; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0169 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA024; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0170 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA040; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0171 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA060; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0172 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA061; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0173 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA064; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0174 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 06/20/2012 GENEA059; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0175 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 07/09/2012 HUES 68 (see details) 0176 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 07/09/2012 HUES 70 (see details) 0177 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 07/09/2012 HUES 69 (see details) 0178 HSCI iPS Core Harvard University 08/07/2012 HUES PGD 10 (see details) 0179 Eggan Lab Harvard University 09/24/2012 GENEA046; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0180 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 10/05/2012 GENEA069; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0181 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 10/05/2012 GENEA070; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0182 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 10/05/2012 GENEA049; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0183 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 11/02/2012 GENEA050; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0184 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 11/02/2012 UCLA 11 (see details) 0185 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 11/20/2012 UCLA 12 (see details) 0186 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 11/20/2012 GENEA062; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0187 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA063; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0188 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA066; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0189 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA067; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0190 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA071; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0191 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA072; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0192 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA073; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0193 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 GENEA074; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0194 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 12/14/2012 HUES PGD 2; possible disease-specific mutation (see details) 0195 Eggan Lab Harvard University 12/14/2012 WA25 (see details) 0196 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 12/14/2012 WA26 (see details) 0197 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 12/14/2012 WA27 (see details) 0198 WiCell Research Institute WiCell Research Institute 12/14/2012 GENEA058; Disease-specific mutation (see details) 0199 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/08/2013 GENEA065; Disease-specific mutation (see details) 0200 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/08/2013 HS346 (see details) 0201 Karolinska Institute Karolinska Institute 03/18/2013 HS401 (see details) 0202 Karolinska Institute Karolinska Institute 03/18/2013 HS420 (see details) 0203 Karolinska Institute Karolinska Institute 03/18/2013 I3 (TE03) (see details) 0204 Technion R&D foundation Technion R&D Foundation 03/18/2013 I4 (TE04) (see details) 0205 Technion R&D foundation Technion R&D Foundation 03/18/2013 I6 (TE06) (see details) 0206 Technion R&D foundation Technion R&D Foundation 03/18/2013 HS799; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0207 Karolinska Institute Karolinska Institute 03/18/2013 UM57-1 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0208 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 03/26/2013 UM22-2 (see details) 0209 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 03/26/2013 CR-4 (see details) 0210 Rick A. Wetsel, Ph.D. University of Texas Hlth Sci Ctr at Houston 05/29/2013 WCMC-37; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0211 Weill Cornell Medical College- Nikica Zaninovic, PhD and Zev Rosenwaks, MD Joan & Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell University 06/27/2013 KCL011 (see details) 0212 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL012; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0213 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KC013; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0214 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL015; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0215 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL016; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0216 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL017; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0217 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL018; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0218 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL021; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0219 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL024; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0220 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL025; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0221 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL026; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0222 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL027; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0223 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL028; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0224 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL029; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0225 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL030; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0226 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 KCL035; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0227 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 09/19/2013 GENEA015 (see details) 0228 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA016 (see details) 0229 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA047 (see details) 0230 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA042 (see details) 0231 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA043 (see details) 0232 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA057 (see details) 0233 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 GENEA052 (see details) 0234 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 09/30/2013 NYUES12 (see details) 0235 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 NYUES11; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0236 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 NYUES13 (see details) 0237 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 NYUES8 (see details) 0238 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 NYUES9 (see details) 0239 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 NYUES10 (see details) 0240 Christoph Hansis, MD, PhD New York University School of Medicine 12/23/2013 KCL036; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0241 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 12/23/2013 KCL042; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0242 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 12/23/2013 KCL043; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0243 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 12/23/2013 GENEA096; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0244 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA090; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0245 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA091; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0246 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA089; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0247 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA097; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0248 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA098; disease-specific mutations (see details) 0249 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA085 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0250 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA082 ; disease-specific mutation, abnormal karyotype (see details) 0251 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA078 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0252 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA079 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0253 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA080 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0254 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA081 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0255 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA083; disease-specific mutations, abnormal karyotype (see details) 0256 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA084 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0257 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA086 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0258 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA087 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0259 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA088 ; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0260 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 GENEA077; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0261 Genea Biocells Genea Biocells 01/29/2014 KCL023 (see details) 0262 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL031 (see details) 0263 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL022 (see details) 0264 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL038 (see details) 0265 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL032 (see details) 0266 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL033 (see details) 0267 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL034 (see details) 0268 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL037 (see details) 0269 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL019 (see details) 0270 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL020 (see details) 0271 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL040 (see details) 0272 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL041; abnormal karyotype/disease-specific mutation (see details) 0273 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 KCL039 (see details) 0274 Dusko Ilic, King's College London King's College London 03/25/2014 UM59-2 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0275 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/09/2014 UM89-1 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0276 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University Of Michigan 04/09/2014 UM63-1 (see details) 0277 Gary D. Smith/University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/09/2014 UM77-2 (see details) 0278 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/09/2014 UM33-4 (see details) 0279 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/09/2014 HUES 75 (see details) 0280 Eggan Lab Harvard University 07/31/2014 HUES 71 (see details) 0281 Eggan Lab Harvard University 07/31/2014 HUES 72 (see details) 0282 Eggan Lab Harvard University 07/31/2014 HUES 73 (see details) 0283 Eggan Lab Harvard University 07/31/2014 CSC14 (see details) 0284 NeoStem, Inc. (Irvine) NeoStem, Inc. 09/18/2014 UM112-1 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0285 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM134-1 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0286 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM90-12 PGS; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0287 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM78-2 (see details) 0288 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM76-1 PGS; abnormal karyotype (see details) 0289 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM114-10 (see details) 0290 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM121-7 (see details) 0291 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UM139-2 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0292 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 09/29/2014 UCLA 13 (see details) 0293 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 UCLA 14 (see details) 0294 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 UCLA 15 (see details) 0295 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 UCLA 16 (see details) 0296 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 UCLA 17 (see details) 0297 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 UCLA 18 (see details) 0298 Steven Peckman University of California, Los Angeles 10/16/2014 WIN-1 (see details) 0299 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maisam Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 10/16/2014 WIN-2 (see details) 0300 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maisam Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 10/16/2014 WIN-3 (see details) 0301 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maisam Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 10/16/2014 WIN-4 (see details) 0302 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maisam Mitalipova Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 10/16/2014 WIN-5 (see details) 0303 Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research/Maisam Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 10/16/2014 HUES 74 (see details) 0304 Eggan Lab Harvard University 04/02/2015 UM25-2 (see details) 0305 Gary D. Smith / University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/02/2015 UM90-14 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0306 Gary D. Smith/ University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/02/2015 UM112-2 PGD; disease-specific mutation (see details) 0307 Gary D. Smith/ University of Michigan University of Michigan 04/02/2015

View original post here:
NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry - Research Using ...

Destructive Embryonic Stem Cell Research | Antiochian …

In this article, we will look at why the Orthodox Church has taken such a stand, how the Church has always stood uncompromisingly for the personhood of the human embryo, and what moral alternatives exist for stem cell research.

Destructive Embryonic Stem Cell Research

By Father Mark Hodges

THE STEM CELL DEBATE IS about the value of human life at its beginning. Stem cells are blank cells which can become all 210 different kinds of human tissue. Researchers hope that someday these cells could provide cures for all kinds of serious diseases, even repairing vital organs. We have stem cells throughout our bodies, but they are most abundant in human embryos. Retrieving embryonic stem cells, however, requires killing those human beings. A raging debate is going on in our nation now, over whether or not taxes should support killing human embryos in order to harvest their stem cells for experimentation.

Many influential groups have taken sides in the debate. You can guess where the pro-abortion groups stand. Drug and research companies also defend destructive embryonic stem cell research. Pro-life groups, of course, are against it. The Vatican condemned research using human embryos as gravely immoral, because removing cells kills an unborn child. U.S. Senator Sam Brownback debated on the floor of the senate: For the first time in our history, it is accept-able for medical researchers to kill one human being to help save another. Ultimately, what lies at the heart of this debate is our view of the human embryo. The central question in this debate is simple: Is the human embryo a person or a piece of property? If unborn persons are living beings, they have dignity and worth, and they deserve protection under the law from harm and destruction. If, however, unborn per-sons are a piece of property, then they can be destroyed with the con-sent of their owner.

The one, holy, catholic and apostolic Orthodox Church has spoken, too. The position of the Orthodox Church on embryonic stem cell research is, In light of the fact that Orthodox Christianity accepts the fact that human life begins at conception, the extraction of stem cells from embryos, which involves the willful taking of human life the embryo is human life and not just a clump of cells is considered morally and ethically wrong in every instance.

In this article, we will look at why the Orthodox Church has taken such a stand, how the Church has always stood uncompromisingly for the personhood of the human embryo, and what moral alternatives exist for stem cell research.

Legally, research on human embryos is allowed because of a faulty Supreme Court definition of personhood at viability (when a baby can lie out-side his/her mother) as worthy of state interest for legal protection. In fact, the whole pro-abortion argument hinges on the lie that there is such a thing as human life which is less than a person, hence unworthy of legal protection. Conversely, Orthodox Christians affirm the image of God from the beginning of human life, and we do not say at any time of development that one human being is of less value or less of a person than another human being.

Stem cells can be harvested from human embryos only by killing them, while the Church has always denounced any such killing and championed the sanctity of human life. The earliest extra-biblical document we have, The Didache, commands, Do not murder a child by abortion, and warns that the Way of Death is filled with people who are murderers of children and abortionists of Gods creatures (5:1-2). The Epistle of Barnabas, another very early document, was equally clear: You shall not destroy your conceptions before they are brought forth. Both call the embryo a child. St. Clement of Alexandria, in the third century, used Luke 1:41 (where John the Baptist leaped in Elizabeths womb) to prove that an embryo is a living person. He calls the earliest conceived embryos human beings who are given birth by Divine Providence, and he condemns those who use abortifacient medicines , causing the outright destruction, together with the fetus, of the whole human race.

Excerpt from:
Destructive Embryonic Stem Cell Research | Antiochian ...